Too Pi**sed to remember if She said No??
Discussion
Ok so following on from the 30% who said rape victims deserved it(for various reasons), comes the woman that cried rape but then admitted she was that drunk she couldn't remember if she'd said yes or not? She then reported that something had happened to the Police who had to ask the man involved if sex had actually taken place!
>> Edited by telecat on Thursday 24th November 11:48
>> Edited by telecat on Thursday 24th November 11:48
Drunken consent 'is still consent to sex'
(Filed: 24/11/2005)
Young women were told yesterday that binge- drinking could cost them the right to complain of being raped. A jury in the trial of a man who had sexual intercourse with a drama student while she was lying unconscious in a public corridor was told: "Drunken consent is still consent."
The warning came on the day Britain prepared for 24-hour licensing laws.
Ryairi Dougal, 20, a student who was working as a security guard when the incident occurred, was accused of attacking the woman after walking her home to her halls of residence.
But because she lost consciousness and could not remember having intercourse the case at Swansea Crown Court collapsed.
The woman, 21, had told the court that she drank "small vodkas" and a glass of wine while getting ready for a party at the arts centre of Aberystwyth University, west Wales.
After only one glass of wine at the party she began to feel unwell and headed for the lavatory, where she slipped over. By now she felt "more drunk than ever before in my life".
A female member of staff said she would find someone to walk her the short distance home and came back with Dougal. They walked to her block of flats. She could not remember climbing the stairs but recalled fumbling for her keys outside the door to her bedsit.
There was little dispute about what happened next. Dougal, from Moville, Co Donegal, Northern Ireland, had sexual intercourse with the woman on the floor of the corridor. The woman said she passed out but came round to be aware that "something was happening but I didn't know what". She then lost consciousness again. Later, after Dougal had left, she went to sleep on top of books left on her bed. The next morning, she told the court: "I was very confused and tried to work out what had happened."
As she stepped outside she had a flashback to a scene from the night before and became worried. Two days later she approached the university's counselling service and the police were called. Dougal told the police that sexual intercourse had taken place.
The woman told the court: "I couldn't believe it. I know I would not have consented. I didn't even know it had happened. If I had wanted to sleep with him I would have taken the few steps to my bedroom."
Cross-examined by Dougal's barrister, Stephen Rees, she admitted "emitting a pleasurable groaning sound" at one stage, but added: "I was unconscious. I stopped groaning as soon as I knew something was happening."
In her statement to police, she said: "I feel I am to blame because I got so drunk I could not remember the events."
Mr Rees put it to her that "effectively" she was saying that she could not remember what she got up to. "No it isn't," she replied. Mr Rees claimed that she now regretted having "steamy, exciting, spontaneous sex" with a stranger.
After her evidence, Huw Rees, for the prosecution, said it would abandon the case. He said: "The question of consent is an essential part of the case. Drunken consent is still consent. She said she could not remember giving consent and that is fatal for the prosecution's case."
The High Court judge, Mr Justice Roderick Evans, agreed with the prosecution and instructed the jury to return a verdict of not guilty. Dougal was found not guilty.
Last night, Leanne Wood, a Welsh Assembly member and a former chairman of Women's Aid Wales, said: "Men should not be given the impression it is acceptable to have sex with a woman who is too drunk to give consent."
(Filed: 24/11/2005)
Young women were told yesterday that binge- drinking could cost them the right to complain of being raped. A jury in the trial of a man who had sexual intercourse with a drama student while she was lying unconscious in a public corridor was told: "Drunken consent is still consent."
The warning came on the day Britain prepared for 24-hour licensing laws.
Ryairi Dougal, 20, a student who was working as a security guard when the incident occurred, was accused of attacking the woman after walking her home to her halls of residence.
But because she lost consciousness and could not remember having intercourse the case at Swansea Crown Court collapsed.
The woman, 21, had told the court that she drank "small vodkas" and a glass of wine while getting ready for a party at the arts centre of Aberystwyth University, west Wales.
After only one glass of wine at the party she began to feel unwell and headed for the lavatory, where she slipped over. By now she felt "more drunk than ever before in my life".
A female member of staff said she would find someone to walk her the short distance home and came back with Dougal. They walked to her block of flats. She could not remember climbing the stairs but recalled fumbling for her keys outside the door to her bedsit.
There was little dispute about what happened next. Dougal, from Moville, Co Donegal, Northern Ireland, had sexual intercourse with the woman on the floor of the corridor. The woman said she passed out but came round to be aware that "something was happening but I didn't know what". She then lost consciousness again. Later, after Dougal had left, she went to sleep on top of books left on her bed. The next morning, she told the court: "I was very confused and tried to work out what had happened."
As she stepped outside she had a flashback to a scene from the night before and became worried. Two days later she approached the university's counselling service and the police were called. Dougal told the police that sexual intercourse had taken place.
The woman told the court: "I couldn't believe it. I know I would not have consented. I didn't even know it had happened. If I had wanted to sleep with him I would have taken the few steps to my bedroom."
Cross-examined by Dougal's barrister, Stephen Rees, she admitted "emitting a pleasurable groaning sound" at one stage, but added: "I was unconscious. I stopped groaning as soon as I knew something was happening."
In her statement to police, she said: "I feel I am to blame because I got so drunk I could not remember the events."
Mr Rees put it to her that "effectively" she was saying that she could not remember what she got up to. "No it isn't," she replied. Mr Rees claimed that she now regretted having "steamy, exciting, spontaneous sex" with a stranger.
After her evidence, Huw Rees, for the prosecution, said it would abandon the case. He said: "The question of consent is an essential part of the case. Drunken consent is still consent. She said she could not remember giving consent and that is fatal for the prosecution's case."
The High Court judge, Mr Justice Roderick Evans, agreed with the prosecution and instructed the jury to return a verdict of not guilty. Dougal was found not guilty.
Last night, Leanne Wood, a Welsh Assembly member and a former chairman of Women's Aid Wales, said: "Men should not be given the impression it is acceptable to have sex with a woman who is too drunk to give consent."
Tricky one this isn't it
She was so pissed she couldn't remember whether she gave her consent or not.
According to the law you have to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt, so of course he or any other man in a similar position couldn't be convicted.
When he might in fact have sh*gged a women who was unconscious.
She was so pissed she couldn't remember whether she gave her consent or not.
According to the law you have to be guilty beyond reasonable doubt, so of course he or any other man in a similar position couldn't be convicted.
When he might in fact have sh*gged a women who was unconscious.
Jaglover said:If you pull someone who's a bit pissed then that's one thing. However, if you pull someone who's utterly pissed, can't walk straight and needs help getting home and then you have sex with them then you're taking advantage of them. I'd hesitate to call someone a rapist but knowingly taking advantage of someone in that state is getting pretty close.
You'd have to be a scumbag to have sex with a woman who was clearly too pissed to think straight if you hadn't discussed the subject before she got in that state in my opinion.
How many blokes pull a bird that way though?, doesn't make them rapists.
>> Edited by dern on Thursday 24th November 12:02
neil.b said:While that's true the ultimate blame should lie with the predatory men prepared to take advantage of women in such circumstances.
Whilst some girls should wise up to the predatory nature of men and think twice before they drink enough to render themselves helpless, rape is rape. Even more so if the girl is unconscious. Jesus christ. 
If you were told that you shouldn't go out in to town and get royally pissed because the chances are that you'd get mugged you'd take it on board and probably not do it but you'd know that you should be able to go out and get royally pissed and the fault that you can't lies fully with the mugger who is prepared to take advantage of your state.... or not?
So this steamy session was all done and dusted in the corridor outside her flat and then didn't continue inside.
Surely if this was a consenting act (even if in the heat of the moment you couldn't have waited until you were in the flat) you would at least go into the flat afterwards.
The guy was supposed to be seeing her safely home, he clearly didn't do that.
Surely if this was a consenting act (even if in the heat of the moment you couldn't have waited until you were in the flat) you would at least go into the flat afterwards.
The guy was supposed to be seeing her safely home, he clearly didn't do that.
dern said:
You'd have to be a scumbag to have sex with a woman who was clearly too pissed to think straight if you hadn't discussed the subject before she got in that state in my opinion.
Spot on.
On another note, call me old-fashioned, but I just wouldn't have sex with a man I'd met only a few hours beforehand even if he was the most gorgeous specimen ever to have graced the planet. Small wonder why men are increasingly thinking of women as fair game the way some of them behave. But we're not all like that and that's important to remember.
dern said:Indeed. Still, anyone who knows the guy in question now knows what a low-life perv he is. He got off on a technicality in effect - it doesn't mean he wasn't guilty. Did she give consent or not? Only he knows. But everyone in the world knows that here is a guy who is quite happy to take advantage of an woman who was totally incapable of fending for herself. I wouldn't give him a job as security in a morgue that's for sure.
You'd have to be a scumbag to have sex with a woman who was clearly too pissed to think straight if you hadn't discussed the subject before she got in that state in my opinion.
How many blokes pull a bird that way though?, doesn't make them rapists.
As for women who allow themselves to get in this state - what are you thinking? While she may not have deserved what happened, and I wouldn't for a second suggest she was "asking for it", this sort of thing happens. Some blokes aren't fussy. Have a bit more respect for yourself, or don't be too surprised when lowlifes don't either.
dern said:
Whilst some girls should wise up to the predatory nature of men and think twice before they drink enough to render themselves helpless, rape is rape. Even more so if the girl is unconscious. Jesus christ.
If you were told that you shouldn't go out in to town and get royally pissed because the chances are that you'd get mugged you'd take it on board and probably not do it but you'd know that you should be able to go out and get royally pissed and the fault that you can't lies fully with the mugger who is prepared to take advantage of your state.... or not?
Yes, that's what I said - it's not the girls fault (in a black & white case) she got drunk.
What I'm saying is, there are some scumbags around who will knowingly take advantage of drunk girls, and not in a cheeky friendly way. With that in mind, ladies, be carefuly out there...
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Or is the problem that when it comes to sex between two adults there is just know way of knowing if consent was given or not. Unfortunately the reality is that is one persons word against another, the defendant is not required to prove himself innocent. I would like to see the verdict of 'Not proven' in rape cases.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff